That makes the compact Mazda crossover our choice – by a smidge – between the two.īut you can't go wrong with either of these vehicles, honestly. And it barely loses any of the Mazda3 hatchback's impressive dynamics and fun-to-drive nature, which we loved so much in our review. The CX-30's taller ride height and higher seating position make it a touch more comfortable on the road. That said, we do like one a bit more than the other: the CX-30. They exist in two different segments, sure, but that doesn't mean much given they have almost the same amount of interior space. Because they're so similar (and therefore, so good) there's nothing truly definitive that sets one apart from the other. Also, both vehicles sport a central digital instrument cluster that offers readouts for things like speed and safety. The Mazda3 and CX-30 have the same steering wheel and the same 8.8-inch touchscreen running the company's latest infotainment setup. The significant interior bits, outside of some stylistic differences, go almost unchanged. Front-wheel-drive comes standard and all-wheel drive is available – both of the cars pictured here have that $1,400 AWD option box ticked. That engine produces 186 horsepower and 186 pound-feet of torque. The same platform props up both vehicles, and the same 2.5-liter four-cylinder engine powers them both, too. But under that shiny sheet metal, the two cars are pretty much identical. Mazda's signature “Kodo” design language (though slightly modified) is the most prominent carryover from the 3 hatchback to the larger CX-30. Obviously, these two cars have more similarities than they do differences. The loaded hatchback costs $28,900 before options, while the most expensive CX-30 Premium costs $29,600. All-wheel drive is $1,400 extra on both vehicles, but at the top of the range, the Mazda3 Premium is actually cheaper. But the CX-30 is actually more affordable to start, asking just $21,900 with a front-wheel-drive configuration. A base front-wheel-drive 2020 Mazda3 hatchback costs $23,700. And both cars can hold 12.7 gallons of fuel in all-wheel-drive configurations.Īnd finally, price. The all-wheel-drive CX-30, surprisingly, is a touch better – achieving 25 mpg city, 32 highway, and 27 combined at its best. At its most efficient, the all-wheel-drive Mazda3 gets 24 miles per gallon city, 32 highway, and 27 combined. Though both cars boast the same 2.5-liter engine and six-speed automatic transmission (and in this case, optional all-wheel drive), fuel economy varies slightly. And cargo space behind the rear seat is almost exactly the same: 20.1 cubic feet in the Mazda3 versus 20.2 in the CX-30. While the CX-30 gets slightly more headroom and a touch extra legroom in the rear, the hatchback offers additional leg and shoulder space up front. Not even a loaded Mazda3 offers either of those options.īut don't let the CX-30's "crossover" label fool you, the high-riding Mazda's passenger space nearly mimics that of the smaller 3. The CX-30 – with the Premium package, as tested – also gets a few minor touches that the 3 doesn't, like rear air vents and a power tailgate. White leather is exclusive to the CX-30, while Mazda keeps red leather for the 3 hatchback only. Squint and you might be able to distinguish the CX-30's multicolored brown dash, black door panels, and white leather seats. Inside the differences between the two cars are less obvious.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |